Twitter alternative Parler soars as conservatives flock to new social network

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bella Ciao is not a MARXIST SONG, it is an adapted partisan song against invaders. In this case the invaders were Nazi/Fascists, so it’s an anti-fascist song. But it was originally an Italian folk song meant to convey harsh working conditions in the 19th century.

Here are the English lyrics:
One morning I woke up

goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye

one morning I woke up

and I found the invader.1

Oh partisan2 take me away

goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye

oh partisan take me away

that I’m feeling like dying

And if I die as a partisan

goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye

and if I die as a partisan

you must bury me

You will bury me over there, on the mountain

goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye

you will bury me over there on the mountain

under the shadow of a wonderful flower

And all the people passing by

goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye

and all the people passing by

will say “what a wonderful flower!”

And this is the flower of the partisan

goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye my Beautiful, goodbye

dead for our freedom

and this is the flower of the partisan

dead for our freedom
Click to expand...
https://lyricstranslate.com
 
Last edited:
Here is my favourite partisan version of the song sung by Milva.

And here is the original sung by Milva.

 
Last edited:
And, thus, I would have no problem with it.

Would sneer a little, of course.
 
I’m roughly the same way about public statues. Campaign against any you like. Win enough legitimate public support, remove them, legally and lawfully.
 
Petition/gather legal support/elect such supporters if necessary/proceed.
 
It shows that Carpe Donktum had repeated valid copyright claims filed against it, according to The DailyCaller. Is responding to repeated violations a strategy for defeating Trump? The DailyCaller also says that there were previous suspensions for violating rules of conduct.
 
ThinkingSapien . . .
It shows that Carpe Donktum had repeated valid copyright claims filed against it . . .
Click to expand...
I’m going to disagree with you here ThinkingSapien.

I think what you are implying anyway, is a partial truth (we’ve been through ths before).

It shows nothing excpt selective enforcement.

Again. We’ve gone over this before.

I have shown you big social media ignoring “policy” regarding their political buddies.

I have also shown you in some cases where big social media was wrong.

You defended big social media and made excuses for them, defending them.

Then after (in some cases) big social media ADMITTED they were wrong and restored those accounts, you ignored it.

If you would like I would be happy to find and link to those posts of yours and mine as I have done before.

I think you are wrong here again not because Carpe Donktum is OK, but because you present this as a violation of policy.

The “policies” by big social media are FAKE.

The real policy (unwritten but observable from their actions) is selective.

That is WHY there is selective enforcement of this “policy”.

I think big social media should have been broken up long ago via anti-trust laws.
 
Last edited:
To the readers here. Also beware the leftists sometimes just plain old lie about copyright claims filed on social media.

This from about a year and a half ago . . .
  • March 21, 2019

Fake YouTube copyright claims used to censor Tim Pool, Lauren Chen, and others​

Live Nation Video network filed false copyright claims against Pool, Chen, Ready To Glare, and Omegon which suppressed their criticism of Desmond the drag kid.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

If you’re tired of cancel culture and censorship subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

A company called Live Nation Video Network recently filed multiple false copyright claims against a number of high profile YouTubers including Tim Pool, Lauren Chen, and Ready To Glare which led to videos that were critical of Desmond the drag kid being taken down.

If you’re not familiar with Desmond the drag kid, he’s an 11 year old boy who dresses in drag. Since his story is very controversial, it’s attracted a lot of discussion and criticism on YouTube.

Live Nation Video Network copyright claimed videos from five different high profile YouTubers with a collective subscriber base of over 1 million subscribers. After the company started to get called out on social media for making these fraudulent copyright claims, it walked some of them back and some of the videos were restored. However, this incident still highlights that YouTube’s broken copyright system can be easily used to fraudulently silence criticism . . .
Click to expand...
reclaimthenet.org

Fake YouTube copyright claims used to censor Tim Pool, Lauren Chen, and others

Live Nation Video network filed false copyright claims against Pool, Chen, Ready To Glare, and Omegon which suppressed their criticism of Desmond the drag kid.
reclaimthenet.org reclaimthenet.org
 
Can anybody name ONE influential leftist Democrat who was removed from Twitter or Facebook? It’s always one-sided.
 
josie_L said:
I guess he means not a moderate democrat.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm…I’m not sure who might be considered not a moderate as I think that may be relative. Maybe AOC? But I don’t think exploring the question would yield much. Two better questions:

What conservatives were suspended or moderated without appeal while not having violated any rules?

What people in the other category (liberal, democrat,…?) have broken rules and not had action taken for it.

For instances of the second question it would be worth reporting any post that are a violation. While twitter has some automated filtering, they rely a lot on people reporting. Bad behaviour that persist may be able to do so because it has not been reported.
 
1cthlctrth . . .
Can anybody name ONE influential leftist Democrat who was removed from Twitter or Facebook? It’s always one-sided.
Click to expand...
I guess you’ve got your questions answered by @ThinkingSapien.

No they can’t.

And yes it is virtually always one-sided.

I must confess, I thought big communications media would put out a few token leftists (at least more than they have done – almost nothing) so they could at least pretend to claim the high ground.

But I was wrong.

They are coming out full-partisan leftist-Democrat pretty much. (Oh there will be a few exceptions. But not many.)
 
Last edited:
I think the problem here is that the supposed violations that the right gets suspended or banned for is not equitably applied to those who do do it on the left.

Why was for example violent language permitted to be used against a minor on Twitter during the Covington fiasco??

There were celebrities and tons of other people advocating violence against a minor.

I do not recollect these individuals being banned or suspended.
 
Last edited:
josie_L said:
There were celebrities and tons of other people advocating violence against a minor.
Click to expand...
Temporary suspensions can be ended by a user by deleting a the tweet in question. If a person is prompt about the deletion, people on the outside looking in will never know that any action was taken on the account unless that person discloses it, they will only see the tweet was deleted.

There were celibrity accounts that made tweets that violated the rules on specific violence. The tweets were later deleted. It is not known whether or not those tweets were deleted because of action by Twitter or the user’s own volition. A consequence of this is that there isn’t a lot of good data for comparison.

Ben Isaac Hoffman called for someone to punch one of the Covington kids in the testicles and post a video of it. That tweet was soon deleted. A producer on Disney’s Beauth and the Beast posted a violent image. Soon afterwards and ever since his account has been private private.

Twitter’s automated moderation is primarily text based. Certain types of actions will invoke quick action. Their system recognizes formats for certain types of personal information. Rose McGowan and Talib Kweli were suspended for tweeting someone’s phone number. The systems also look out for key words. Courtney Love was suspended for using directed violent language. The keyword filters don’t understand context though. A japanese man was permanently suspended for “making a death threat” in a tweet about a mosquito that was bothering him.

Twitter has never disclosed the full details, but their filters will also be more sensitive to some people based on patterns in their tweets. There was a young lady with the last name “Fierce” that was suspended for sending a tweet to Mike Pence containing two words that rhyme with “Luck” and “Too.” That isn’t against the rules per se. But she had a history of sensing such tweets to people and the automated systems took action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top